Skip to content

Add infra-image to MCO bootstrap #1292

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 1, 2019

Conversation

umohnani8
Copy link
Contributor

Need to get the pod image for the MCO so that it can be set
in crio.conf.

Signed-off-by: Urvashi Mohnani [email protected]

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. label Feb 21, 2019
@umohnani8
Copy link
Contributor Author

@runcom @mrunalp PTAL
@sjenning what should the infra image be? We couldn't find pod in an of the payloads.

@mrunalp
Copy link
Member

mrunalp commented Feb 22, 2019

@wking @abhinavdahiya ptal.

@umohnani8
Copy link
Contributor Author

/test e2e-aws

@rphillips
Copy link
Contributor

I don't think this PR will pass until the MCO PR is merged to populate the pod field:

$ docker run   registry.svc.ci.openshift.org/openshift/origin-release:v4.0 image pod
F0222 18:00:48.439865       1 image.go:36] error: error: Unknown name requested, could not find pod in UpdatePayload

Need to get the pod image for the MCO so that it can be set
in crio.conf.

Signed-off-by: Urvashi Mohnani <[email protected]>
@cgwalters
Copy link
Member

Dependent PR openshift/machine-config-operator#494 merged.

/lgtm

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Feb 25, 2019
@wking
Copy link
Member

wking commented Feb 26, 2019

From the bootkube.service logs:

Feb 25 20:13:25 ip-10-0-5-161 bootkube.sh[4506]: Pulling release image...
Feb 25 20:13:36 ip-10-0-5-161 bootkube.sh[4506]: d23e828e6bb262f668b7d635910dc4d4651208cb2a50271687be4111c957c48a
Feb 25 20:13:42 ip-10-0-5-161 bootkube.sh[4506]: F0225 20:13:42.919053       1 image.go:36] error: error: Unknown name requested, could not find pod in UpdatePayload

Who's injecting the pod image? And just in case it has come in since that test run...

/retest

@runcom
Copy link
Member

runcom commented Feb 26, 2019

The pod image will be injected by the MCO. AIUI this PR is required for the MCO pr which injects the image to land. And that error is expected (unless everything else fails cause of that)

@wking
Copy link
Member

wking commented Feb 26, 2019

And that error is expected (unless everything else fails cause of that)

Yeah, currently this failure is blocking further bootkube.service progress as shown in the logs. Is there a reason you can't inject the image yet?

@cgwalters
Copy link
Member

cgwalters commented Feb 26, 2019

OK yes sorry, I was wrong in this comment. We do need to add it to image-references but ensure it's not substituted.

@umohnani8
Copy link
Contributor Author

@cgwalters so open a PR in MCO with just the image-references change?

@cgwalters
Copy link
Member

@cgwalters so open a PR in MCO with just the image-references change?

Right. Sorry about this...it is very confusing I know.

@umohnani8
Copy link
Contributor Author

/retest

@umohnani8
Copy link
Contributor Author

Still seeing the same thing in bootkube.service even after openshift/machine-config-operator#500 got in. @cgwalters anything else I am missing?
re-running again just to double check.
/retest

@umohnani8
Copy link
Contributor Author

Still failing with

Feb 26 19:20:14 ip-10-0-6-84 bootkube.sh[4521]: Pulling release image...
Feb 26 19:20:26 ip-10-0-6-84 bootkube.sh[4521]: 10e7b38024340e2ebdbc10854fb3583c221340390cd1b4173c0ee39b9988339c
Feb 26 19:20:32 ip-10-0-6-84 bootkube.sh[4521]: F0226 19:20:32.450118       1 image.go:36] error: error: Unknown name requested, could not find pod in UpdatePayload

@umohnani8
Copy link
Contributor Author

/retest

@umohnani8
Copy link
Contributor Author

@runcom @cgwalters aws still failing. Seeing similar failure to what was happening in openshift/machine-config-operator#471

@cgwalters
Copy link
Member

@runcom @cgwalters aws still failing. Seeing similar failure to what was happening in openshift/machine-config-operator#471

It's probably

openshift/machine-config-operator#508

@umohnani8
Copy link
Contributor Author

/retest

1 similar comment
@umohnani8
Copy link
Contributor Author

/retest

@cgwalters
Copy link
Member

Can someone approve this? It's definitely for 4.0.

@runcom
Copy link
Member

runcom commented Mar 1, 2019

/approve
/lgtm

@runcom
Copy link
Member

runcom commented Mar 1, 2019

oh gosh, realized this is not MCO repo (too fast)

@abhinavdahiya
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: abhinavdahiya, cgwalters, runcom, umohnani8

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Mar 1, 2019
cgwalters added a commit to cgwalters/machine-config-operator that referenced this pull request Mar 1, 2019
When openshift/installer#1292 lands
this will undo the hacks to enable the CVO-driven pod image.
@cgwalters
Copy link
Member

And then the crazy dance should finally conclude with openshift/machine-config-operator#518 after this merges. Hopefully!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

9 participants